“According to the fair play of the world, Let me have audience.” William Shakespeare Whilst Shakespeare’s words echo in English law and legal practice, what fair play actually looks like in our modern, complicated and interconnected world has been the subject of debate of late. Specifically, the topic of bias in arbitration has been put under the microscope by two noteworthy judgments of the English High Court and new International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) guidance…
Interview with Ronaldo Cramer, vice-president of the Rio de Janeiro branch of the Brazilian Bar Association, offered to Rodrigo…
The Singapore High Court has recently dismissed a challenge to set aside an arbitration award in AYH v…
The topic of arbitrator bias has been the subject of two recent English law cases: W Limited v. M SDN BHD [2016] EWHC 422 (Comm) (which was covered in our recent blog post here) and Cofely Ltd v Bingham & Knowles Limited [2016] EWHC 240. These cases provide useful guidance on the factors considered by the English courts when assessing whether an arbitrator is conflicted and the circumstances under which the court will agree to…
In a recent case the English High Court refused to apply the IBA Guidelines on Conflicts of Interest…
You might have asked yourself whether it really makes a difference whether you agree in your arbitration clause…
In January 2016, the German Federal Supreme Court had to deal with the question whether an arbitral tribunal has jurisdiction to decide on a claim if the parties agreed on expert determination proceedings prior to arbitration but the claimant directly filed a request for arbitration. The Federal Supreme Court ruled that a pactum de non petendo included in an agreement on expert determination does not affect the arbitral tribunal’s competence to rule on a claim…
In its decision dated March 22, 2016 (case no. 4A_678/2015), the Swiss Federal Supreme Court was called upon to…
Document production, at least to some extent, is an integral part of most international arbitration proceedings. This is…
On 23 February 2016,[1] the Austrian Supreme Court (“OGH”) rendered a new decision on an action to set aside an arbitral award. Notably, this is the fourth decision since the OGH was vested with the exclusive competence for setting aside proceedings in 2014. In its decision, the OGH once more confirmed its strict stance with regard to the violation of the right to be heard. In addition, the decision contains remarks concerning the violation of…